Skip to main content

About your Search

English 27
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)
Feb 14, 2013 5:30pm PST
republicans-- including john mccain and lindsey graham-- were coming out of a meeting with republicans saying "we're satisfied in the case of john mccain and graham, request the answers we got about benghazi from the white house. we're satisfied now. but we don't think other senators have had enough time. they're not on the arms services commit tee so we'll vote to hold this up now, when we come back in ten days we'll vote yes. it's not blocking, we just want to slow down." >> warner: what were the motivations? you had reid taking it to a vote where it was predicted he would lose and republicans said yeah we'll vote for it in another ten days but not now. what are the politics here? >> on the republican side, the politics have shifted from the center of the three amigos on national security, jindsy graham john mccain and senator kelly ayotte from new hampshire. it's shifted away from them. they had questions about benghazi which had been a major political issue since before the election. those seem to be moving off the table now. there are senators on the right who are asking questions about
Feb 1, 2013 5:30pm PST
, beginning with john mccain who apparently is convinced at this point in his life the most seminal event in u.s. history was not the constitutional convention, concord, lexington or-- it was the surge. and where you stood on the surge. >> woodruff: in iraq. >> in iraq that determines whether, in fact, you are a visionary or a retrograde. but i was-- it was a lousy performance by chuck hagel. he obviously decided he wasn't going get confrontational. when ted cruz, the junior senator from texas basically accused him of dishonesty, raised questions about his honor, and-- the idea that chuck hagel, that david and i know didn't say wait a minute, you know, and he did at the last question, i'm out of time now but let me ask you about this about your speeches and what you reported and didn't report. i mean at that point chuck hagel says let me tell you, you know, you've just raised a question, i don't care about time or time being out this is my time to tell you, you know, that you are absolutely wrong and-- and that was just missing completely. >> woodruff: so there is some reporting that hagel thi
Feb 15, 2013 5:30pm PST
a grea great-- oppose tate act. he endorsed john mccain as president. he went tohe republican convention we are criticized, the democrat eck nominee barack obama and endorsed mccain and sarah palin. and when joe campaigned in 20080 with mccain, comes back to the senate and senate democrats make him the chairman of standing committee, contrast that with chuck hagel. 84% of americans for conservative action, voting record in his canner radio, voting for the bush tax cuts, voted for the war in iraq, oted against no child left behind but was a small government conservative, and republicans right now, particularly tea party, are not looking for converts like the democrats were with joe leiberman. they're looking for heretics. and they see in chuck hagel who never endorsed barack obama, was friendly with him, traveled with him, but didn't endorse him. they see this terrible heretic. and it's really, that is where the republicans are right now. they are looking for heretics instead of converts. and i think it's apparent in the tea party. but i think it's apparent in the ranks of the entire rank
Jan 31, 2013 5:30pm PST
john mccain made clear, they haven't forgotten. >> were you correct or incorrect when you said that the surge would be the most dangerous foreign policy blunder in this country since vietnam? were you correct or incorrect, yes or no? >> my reference to the surge being the most dangerous. >> are you going to answer the question, senator hagel? the question is were you right or wrong? that's a pretty straightforward question. i would like an answer on whether you were right or wrong, then you're free to elaborate. >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no answer on a lot of things. >> well let the record show that you refused to answer the question. now please go ahead. >> well, if you'd like me to explain why ... >> i'd actually like an answer, yes or no? >> well, i'm not going to give you a yes or no. i think it's far more complicated than that, as i've already said. my answer is i'll defer that judgment to history. as to the comment i made about >> i think history has already made a judgment about the surge, sir, and you're on the wrong side of it. and your refusal to ans
Feb 26, 2013 5:30pm PST
to withdraw the hagel nomination. but on sunday arizona senator john mccain said president obama's choice deserved an up or down vote. >> i do not believe that chuck hagel, who is a friend of mine, is qualified to be secretary of defense. but i do believe that elections have consequences. >> woodruff: today 18 g.o.p. senators joined with democrats to end the filibuster. hours later, the senate confirmed hagel, 58-41. mainly along party lines. for more we turn to mark thompson, "time" magazine's national security reporter. welcome back to the program. so after all the storm and the fury from republicans, enough of them voted to let this confirmation takes place. what was this all about? >> basically it was on valentine's day that the senate would not let this proceed to an up-or-down vote. instead basically the republicans were looking for something to derail the nomination so for 12 days the nation waited essentially leon panetta was running over to nato and back to his walnut farm. we really didn't have a true secretary of defense other than this lame duck. today finally the republicans
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)